15:17:04 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me

15:17:04 <Zakim> MacTed should no longer be muted

15:17:10 <Luc> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-prov-wg/2012Mar/0230.html

15:17:13 <MacTed> q+

15:17:16 <smiles> smiles: Will prepare for end of the month, with input from Paolo on inconsistencies with DM, from Stian on inconsistencies with PROVO

15:19:09 <tlebo> +1 @macted, we should stick to eggs and unchewed gum.

15:19:33 <smiles> MacTed: express examples in terms of real world things, as expiry and change over time unclear with current examples

15:19:57 <MacTed> Zakim, mute me

15:19:57 <Zakim> MacTed should now be muted

15:20:14 <smiles> Luc: three proposals circulated, second and third had support

15:20:56 <smiles> ... first did not have consensus, cannot be adopted, so will try to change and discuss

15:21:11 <GK> q+ to say I think a concrete example for wanting prop 1 would help

15:21:21 <smiles> ... can incorporate second, third proposal in editors draft, can raise issues against in tracker in usual way

15:21:27 <Luc> ack mac

15:21:46 <smiles> GK: First proposal needs motivating example

15:21:57 <GK> ack gk

15:21:57 <Zakim> GK, you wanted to say I think a concrete example for wanting prop 1 would help

15:22:21 <dgarijo> +q

15:22:21 <GK> I'm hearing, but see chat if you can't hear me

15:22:32 <Luc> we can't hear you

15:22:44 <smiles> GK: <some random sounds>

15:22:50 <GK> Yes

15:23:03 <GK> Well, that was it -- a concrete example that shows...

15:23:14 <GK> ... why it's useful to have entioty expiration.

15:23:28 <smiles> Luc: Are examples in proposal not satisfactory?

15:23:31 <GK> I didn't find them compelling ... need to rechack.

15:23:51 <Luc> ACCEPTED: to rename wasStartedBy(activity,activity) in wasStartedByActivity(activity,activity)

15:23:54 <Zakim> -GK

15:24:06 <Luc> AcceptED: to formulate start and end of activities independently of responsibility and agents. Hence, start and end of activity would no longer be a form of activity association. Instead of an agent, an optional entity trigger would be allowed.

15:24:16 <Zakim> +??P28

15:24:20 <dgarijo> I had a question about proposal 2 :(

15:24:28 <GK> zakim, ??p28 is me

15:24:28 <Zakim> +GK; got it

15:24:39 <Paolo> http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/ProvDMWorkingDraft5

15:25:08 <dgarijo> well, the subject has changed..

15:25:11 <dgarijo> -q

15:25:17 <smiles> Paolo: Work in progress on WD5, some of to do list are being tracked

15:25:18 <Luc> q?

15:25:39 <Paolo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-components.html

15:26:12 <smiles> ... As seen on agenda, component structure now excludes core/component divide

15:26:41 <Paolo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-quote.html

15:26:47 <smiles> ... New structure reflects discussion on list, please look at it and raise objections

15:26:59 <Zakim> +??P62

15:27:10 <GK> To follow up my previous comment, the examples given explain what might trigger an expiration assertion, but do not explain why this is useful or needed for provenance (i.e. assertions about things that have happened - if the provenance is asserted, then presumably referenced entities existed at that time - if they disappeared later, is that really something we need to know?)

15:27:15 <kai> zakim, ??P62 is me.

15:27:15 <Zakim> +kai; got it

15:27:23 <smiles> ... Quotation / orginal source controversy - could not see where distinction is

15:27:31 <Paolo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-components.html#term-value

15:27:32 <dgarijo> I really have to leave. Apologies...

15:27:36 <dgarijo> bye!

15:27:45 <Zakim> -??P42

15:27:46 <kai> @dgarijo: i take over :-)

15:28:18 <smiles> ... Literals are now expressed as syntactic construct, all we say about values is that they have a type: qualified name, XSD type

15:28:45 <Paolo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-collections.html

15:29:34 <smiles> ... Collections is work in progress, tried to accommodate open issues and agreed with Stian what to include, final iterations with proposed version in above link

15:30:13 <smiles> ... primitive relations regarding insertion, deletion; data types for collections; additional relations to simplify expressions with multiple key-value pairs

15:30:37 <Paolo> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/default/model/working-copy/wd5-prov-dm-plan.html

15:31:05 <smiles> ... Agents in association: proposed new formulation for wasAssociatedWith; plan to open for discussion; if no controversy will be in next draft

15:31:13 <Luc> q?

15:31:53 <smiles> Luc: For all edits, discussed issues with people, will now include in WD and notify WG when done

15:32:20 <Luc> q?

15:32:25 <smiles> ... still to address feedback on WD4 to incorporate in document, go through remaining issues; revision by end of the month

15:32:28 <smiles> q+

15:33:00 <smiles> smiles: What is controversial, under development?

15:33:23 <smiles> Luc: Once collections issues addressed, only presentational issues remain, so stable model

15:33:40 <smiles> ... Proposal 1 above is still controversial: expiry

15:33:45 <Luc> q?

15:33:50 <Luc> ack sm

15:34:08 <smiles> Paolo: Agreed, everything before expiry proposal, everything settling down

15:34:35 <smiles> ... Not everything in collections draft is uncontroversial but getting there

15:34:42 <khalidbelhajjame> @smiles,  do you intend to speak about collections in the primer?

15:35:08 <Luc> q?

15:35:27 <smiles> ... New pieces in BNF for optional arguments, impact on PROVN examples

15:35:33 <Luc> q?

15:37:22 <Luc> q?

15:37:28 <smiles> Paolo: should be pedagogical text on collections in primer

15:37:47 <Luc> q?

<Luc>Topic: Free form discussion on destruction/expiry

<Luc>Summary: We had a free discussion around proposal 1. Two salient points were made: the proposal lacks a compelling example of this notion of 'destruction', and it lacks an explanation of why it matters from a provenance viewpoint. Macted suggested an example of a painting burned in a fire (destruction event) and reappearing later at an auction.  The editors will revisit the proposal in the light of these suggestions.

15:38:14 <smiles> Luc: Finished agenda, but useful to discuss expiry

Luc Moreau: Finished agenda, but useful to discuss expiry ←

15:38:33 <MacTed> Zakim, unmute me

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, unmute me ←

15:38:33 <Zakim> MacTed was not muted, MacTed

Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed was not muted, MacTed ←

15:39:23 <GK> I can hear OK, but not speak

Graham Klyne: I can hear OK, but not speak ←

15:39:34 <GK> To follow up my previous comment, the examples given explain what might trigger an expiration assertion, but do not explain why this is useful or needed for provenance (i.e. assertions about things that have happened - if the provenance is asserted, then presumably referenced entities existed at that time - if they disappeared later, is that really something we need to know?)

Graham Klyne: To follow up my previous comment, the examples given explain what might trigger an expiration assertion, but do not explain why this is useful or needed for provenance (i.e. assertions about things that have happened - if the provenance is asserted, then presumably referenced entities existed at that time - if they disappeared later, is that really something we need to know?) ←

15:40:01 <khalidbelhajjame> Is the objection against the example or the notion of expiration?

Khalid Belhajjame: Is the objection against the example or the notion of expiration? ←

15:40:18 <smiles> MacTed: An entity may be referred to after being destroyed

Ted Thibodeau: An entity may be referred to after being destroyed ←

15:40:36 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q? ←

15:40:41 <smiles> ... what do we mean here?

... what do we mean here? ←

15:40:43 <tlebo> unbroken eggs and unchewed gum!

Timothy Lebo: unbroken eggs and unchewed gum! ←

15:40:45 <Curt> "invalid" = no longer can be 'used' by an activity

Curt Tilmes: "invalid" = no longer can be 'used' by an activity ←

15:40:47 <GK> The notion.  In my case, I'm not seeing why it's useful for provenance.  Use-case?

Graham Klyne: The notion. In my case, I'm not seeing why it's useful for provenance. Use-case? ←

15:41:04 <GK> I'm not opposing it, just not supporting it.

Graham Klyne: I'm not opposing it, just not supporting it. ←

15:41:09 <GK> Why do we care?

Graham Klyne: Why do we care? ←

15:41:09 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:41:35 <jcheney> q+

James Cheney: q+ ←

15:42:22 <smiles> ... Table example (logs to table, table broken up and burnt); in contrast, resolution on web gets latest revision, so not really identifying one entity

... Table example (logs to table, table broken up and burnt); in contrast, resolution on web gets latest revision, so not really identifying one entity ←

15:42:50 <tlebo> Let the web people deal with the web problems, not the provenance people. "not able to be used again" is a useful notion (eggs and gum)

Timothy Lebo: Let the web people deal with the web problems, not the provenance people. "not able to be used again" is a useful notion (eggs and gum) ←

15:43:01 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:43:03 <Luc> ack pao

Luc Moreau: ack pao ←

15:43:28 <MacTed> Zakim, who's noisy?

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, who's noisy? ←

15:43:38 <Zakim> MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: [IPcaller] (55%), Paolo (85%), MacTed (24%)

Zakim IRC Bot: MacTed, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: [IPcaller] (55%), Paolo (85%), MacTed (24%) ←

15:43:47 <MacTed> Zakim, mute [IPcaller]

Ted Thibodeau: Zakim, mute [IPcaller] ←

15:43:47 <Zakim> [IPcaller] should now be muted

Zakim IRC Bot: [IPcaller] should now be muted ←

15:44:13 <MacTed> I don't know who [IPcaller] is ... but hopefully they can unmute themselves when they figure it out

Ted Thibodeau: I don't know who [IPcaller] is ... but hopefully they can unmute themselves when they figure it out ←

15:45:17 <smiles> Paolo: Want to demarcate lifetime of entity, existence to non-existence (becomes another entity), but can refer to forever

Paolo Missier: Want to demarcate lifetime of entity, existence to non-existence (becomes another entity), but can refer to forever ←

15:45:17 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:45:20 <Curt> The examples *don't* discuss things that are 'destroyed', just things that are no longer accessible/available.

Curt Tilmes: The examples *don't* discuss things that are 'destroyed', just things that are no longer accessible/available. ←

15:45:27 <tlebo> having the symmetric to "Generated" seems to be rather nice.

Timothy Lebo: having the symmetric to "Generated" seems to be rather nice. ←

15:45:29 <GK> So what does the entity URI identify when the entity ceases to exist?

Graham Klyne: So what does the entity URI identify when the entity ceases to exist? ←

15:45:29 <smiles> ... Nothing to do with real thing getting destroyed

... Nothing to do with real thing getting destroyed ←

15:46:25 <smiles> jcheney: Important to distinguish entity which is information valid during a time interval from thing described by that information which can be created, destroyed

James Cheney: Important to distinguish entity which is information valid during a time interval from thing described by that information which can be created, destroyed ←

15:47:02 <smiles> ... start and end of both are valid to talk about

... start and end of both are valid to talk about ←

15:47:22 <khalidbelhajjame> The entity is invalidated not when the thing is distroyed, but when it the entity is no longer reflect the thing it represents.

Khalid Belhajjame: The entity is invalidated not when the thing is distroyed, but when it the entity is no longer reflect the thing it represents. ←

15:47:29 <smiles> MacTed: An entity is a thing which is described, not the description

Ted Thibodeau: An entity is a thing which is described, not the description ←

15:47:29 <Paolo> +

Paolo Missier: + ←

15:47:39 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:47:40 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:47:53 <smiles> Luc: Description holds or not

Luc Moreau: Description holds or not ←

15:47:58 <GK> If there's any meaning here, I think its to do with validity of statements *about* the entity.

Graham Klyne: If there's any meaning here, I think its to do with validity of statements *about* the entity. ←

15:49:22 <smiles> jcheney: Lack of entity expiry in semantics not difficult in itself, but awkward if want to say "table stopped being in room on Wednesday"

James Cheney: Lack of entity expiry in semantics not difficult in itself, but awkward if want to say "table stopped being in room on Wednesday" ←

15:49:28 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:49:28 <Curt> If the characterization of an entity includes the attribute that it be available through a URL, then when that URL no longer refers to that content, then entity is 'destroyed'.

Curt Tilmes: If the characterization of an entity includes the attribute that it be available through a URL, then when that URL no longer refers to that content, then entity is 'destroyed'. ←

15:49:41 <Paolo> q?

Paolo Missier: q? ←

15:49:51 <jcheney> q-

James Cheney: q- ←

15:49:59 <smiles> MacTed: Entity is the thing not the desciption of the thing

Ted Thibodeau: Entity is the thing not the desciption of the thing ←

15:50:03 <GK> I suppose it might be seen as implying a contextual constraint on statements like "entity dc:creator Foo"?

Graham Klyne: I suppose it might be seen as implying a contextual constraint on statements like "entity dc:creator Foo"? ←

15:50:33 <smiles> Luc: Agree with GK that it is about validity of statements about the entity

Luc Moreau: Agree with GK that it is about validity of statements about the entity ←

15:50:39 <Curt> an entity is a set of attributes that characterize something  When one of those attributes changes (any of them), you are talking about a different entity.

Curt Tilmes: an entity is a set of attributes that characterize something When one of those attributes changes (any of them), you are talking about a different entity. ←

15:51:02 <Paolo> I am going by this definition: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Entities

Paolo Missier: I am going by this definition: http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsStrawman#Entities ←

15:51:13 <tlebo> @macted, yes.

Timothy Lebo: @macted, yes. ←

15:51:13 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:51:50 <Luc> ack paol

Luc Moreau: ack paol ←

15:51:51 <GK> If we think of provenance in terms of entities interacting with processes, then the points at which provenance applies are exactly when those interactions occur?

Graham Klyne: If we think of provenance in terms of entities interacting with processes, then the points at which provenance applies are exactly when those interactions occur? ←

15:52:06 <smiles> Paolo: Should follow definitions in strawman formal semantics

Paolo Missier: Should follow definitions in strawman formal semantics ←

15:52:46 <smiles> ... If no compelling reason to have concept, then more trouble than its worth

... If no compelling reason to have concept, then more trouble than its worth ←

15:53:31 <GK> ... or in spans delimited by those interactions?

Graham Klyne: ... or in spans delimited by those interactions? ←

15:53:38 <jcheney> Current version is at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsWD3#Entities

James Cheney: Current version is at http://www.w3.org/2011/prov/wiki/FormalSemanticsWD3#Entities ←

15:54:04 <smiles> MacTed: An entity has internal integrity solidified by attributes which are immutable, depending on timeslice

Ted Thibodeau: An entity has internal integrity solidified by attributes which are immutable, depending on timeslice ←

15:54:37 <smiles> ... e.g. a table is an entity which is a timeslice of the wood comprising it

... e.g. a table is an entity which is a timeslice of the wood comprising it ←

15:55:01 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:55:04 <GK> I *would* see some point if there were an action that "expired" an entity.

Graham Klyne: I *would* see some point if there were an action that "expired" an entity. ←

15:55:05 <khalidbelhajjame> q+

Khalid Belhajjame: q+ ←

15:55:09 <jcheney> @MacTed, please raise issues against semantics if what is there is unclear or could be improved

James Cheney: @MacTed, please raise issues against semantics if what is there is unclear or could be improved ←

15:55:20 <smiles> Luc: Do not want unbounded discussion, so need prepration, proposals

Luc Moreau: Do not want unbounded discussion, so need prepration, proposals ←

15:55:35 <GK> The problem is I don't oppose this idea, just don't support it :)

Graham Klyne: The problem is I don't oppose this idea, just don't support it :) ←

15:55:43 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:56:13 <smiles> Luc: Can MacTed, others formulate notion of end of lifetime in your terms?

Luc Moreau: Can MacTed, others formulate notion of end of lifetime in your terms? ←

15:56:26 <khalidbelhajjame> -q

Khalid Belhajjame: -q ←

15:56:32 <Paolo> q+

Paolo Missier: q+ ←

15:57:00 <GK> I think the onus is on those who think the concept is useful to come up with compelling examples.

Graham Klyne: I think the onus is on those who think the concept is useful to come up with compelling examples. ←

15:57:20 <GK> They didn't compel me.

Graham Klyne: They didn't compel me. ←

15:57:29 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:57:29 <khalidbelhajjame> +q

Khalid Belhajjame: +q ←

15:57:30 <Curt> I agree - they are not compelling

Curt Tilmes: I agree - they are not compelling ←

15:57:41 <Luc> ack kh

Luc Moreau: ack kh ←

15:57:54 <GK> ... the examples given explain what might trigger an expiration assertion, but do not explain why this is useful or needed for provenance (i.e. assertions about things that have happened - if the provenance is asserted, then presumably referenced entities existed at that time - if they disappeared later, is that really something we need to know?)

Graham Klyne: ... the examples given explain what might trigger an expiration assertion, but do not explain why this is useful or needed for provenance (i.e. assertions about things that have happened - if the provenance is asserted, then presumably referenced entities existed at that time - if they disappeared later, is that really something we need to know?) ←

15:58:21 <smiles> khalid: Do we need notion of destroy/expire in any application?

Khalid Belhajjame: Do we need notion of destroy/expire in any application? ←

15:58:40 <MacTed> if a Great Master's painting (original canvas) is burned in a museum fire, this is important knowledge when it apparently surfaces later at auction...

Ted Thibodeau: if a Great Master's painting (original canvas) is burned in a museum fire, this is important knowledge when it apparently surfaces later at auction... ←

15:58:48 <Curt> I've got to go, but I'll think about this some more...

Curt Tilmes: I've got to go, but I'll think about this some more... ←

15:58:52 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

15:58:54 <Zakim> -Curt_Tilmes

Zakim IRC Bot: -Curt_Tilmes ←

15:58:56 <GK> I see here there's a weak consensus for leaving expiration as proposed.  Nobody opposed it, just lots of people didn't care.

Graham Klyne: I see here there's a weak consensus for leaving expiration as proposed. Nobody opposed it, just lots of people didn't care. ←

15:58:58 <Zakim> -olaf

Zakim IRC Bot: -olaf ←

15:59:01 <MacTed> (concrete, real world, not rotten eggs...)

Ted Thibodeau: (concrete, real world, not rotten eggs...) ←

15:59:40 <smiles> Paolo: Will come up with a couple more examples, seems odd to express only one end of timeslice

Paolo Missier: Will come up with a couple more examples, seems odd to express only one end of timeslice ←

16:00:03 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:00:11 <Luc> ack paolo

Luc Moreau: ack paolo ←

16:01:00 <GK> @paolo I mentioned earlier that if there were a specific activity-related event that causes an entity toi be invalidated, that would make sense.

Graham Klyne: @paolo I mentioned earlier that if there were a specific activity-related event that causes an entity toi be invalidated, that would make sense. ←

16:01:08 <smiles> Luc: MacTed please share definition by email

Luc Moreau: MacTed please share definition by email ←

16:01:32 <GK> @Luc - burned poainting - se eprevious comment :)

Graham Klyne: @Luc - burned poainting - se eprevious comment :) ←

16:01:36 <smiles> ... GK, MacTed's example is interesting one to motivate

... GK, MacTed's example is interesting one to motivate ←

16:01:43 <Luc> q?

Luc Moreau: q? ←

16:01:52 <GK> Bye.

Graham Klyne: Bye. ←

16:01:53 <Zakim> -tlebo

Zakim IRC Bot: -tlebo ←

16:01:54 <Zakim> -khalidbelhajjame

Zakim IRC Bot: -khalidbelhajjame ←

16:01:55 <Zakim> -jun

Zakim IRC Bot: -jun ←

16:01:56 <Zakim> -SamCoppens

Zakim IRC Bot: -SamCoppens ←

16:01:56 <Zakim> -kai

Zakim IRC Bot: -kai ←

16:01:59 <Zakim> - +1.443.708.aacc

Zakim IRC Bot: - +1.443.708.aacc ←

16:02:00 <Zakim> -MacTed

Zakim IRC Bot: -MacTed ←

16:02:01 <Zakim> -jcheney

Zakim IRC Bot: -jcheney ←

16:02:02 <Zakim> -GK

Zakim IRC Bot: -GK ←

16:02:08 <Zakim> -Luc

Zakim IRC Bot: -Luc ←

16:02:10 <Zakim> -Paolo

Zakim IRC Bot: -Paolo ←

16:02:25 <Zakim> -[IPcaller]

Zakim IRC Bot: -[IPcaller] ←

16:02:34 <Luc> rrsagent, set log public

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, set log public ←

16:02:37 <Luc> rrsagent, draft minutes

Luc Moreau: rrsagent, draft minutes ←

16:02:37 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/03/15-prov-minutes.html Luc

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/03/15-prov-minutes.html Luc ←

16:02:42 <Luc> trackbot, end telcon

Luc Moreau: trackbot, end telcon ←

16:02:42 <trackbot> Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help

Trackbot IRC Bot: Sorry, Luc, I don't understand 'trackbot, end telcon '. Please refer to http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/irc for help ←

16:03:15 <smiles> trackbot, end telecon

trackbot, end telecon ←

16:03:15 <trackbot> Zakim, list attendees

Trackbot IRC Bot: Zakim, list attendees ←

16:03:15 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been Luc, Paolo, MacTed, Curt_Tilmes, dgarijo?, +1.315.723.aaaa, tlebo, +49.302.093.aabb, +1.443.708.aacc, jun, jcheney, SamCoppens, GK,

Zakim IRC Bot: As of this point the attendees have been Luc, Paolo, MacTed, Curt_Tilmes, dgarijo?, +1.315.723.aaaa, tlebo, +49.302.093.aabb, +1.443.708.aacc, jun, jcheney, SamCoppens, GK, ←

16:03:19 <Zakim> ... +49.302.093.aaee, olaf, khalidbelhajjame, [IPcaller], kai

Zakim IRC Bot: ... +49.302.093.aaee, olaf, khalidbelhajjame, [IPcaller], kai ←

16:03:23 <trackbot> RRSAgent, please draft minutes

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, please draft minutes ←

16:03:23 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/03/15-prov-minutes.html trackbot

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/03/15-prov-minutes.html trackbot ←

16:03:24 <trackbot> RRSAgent, bye

Trackbot IRC Bot: RRSAgent, bye ←

16:03:24 <RRSAgent> I see no action items

RRSAgent IRC Bot: I see no action items ←

Formatted by CommonScribe Show Interleaved IRC Text

---